love at the first sight
i wasn’t even bold enough yet to assume that it could be made possible
What would an economist call this situation?
- Thread starter Secret Master
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
i wasn’t even bold enough yet to assume that it could be made possible
I'm fairly new to V3, and actually I loaded this save, just to see what you were talking about, and see if my machine would load it (and it will)...but I must be missing something, or don't understand 'turn off' construction or 'turn on' construction. The queue has tons in it, and is working on it...and blows through it before long, with no running in the red financially...
I'm sure there's something I'm missing here.
Attachments
194 CP worth of buildings isn't that much. It's just a few government buildings.
When I say "turn it on" I mean fill the queue so that all 24000 CP are in use.
The save has 1 page of constructions. Filling the queue to use all 24000 CP looks like this:
A full queue has 114 pages of construction.
It's basically drinking from the firehose in the film UHF.
So, you have too many people. Is there a possibility that one of your neighbours is powerful enough for some really unreasonable demands to convince them to let you use them for a good ol'fashioned patriotic war? Everyone knows that a good war is a good distraction from your economic woes, and when your economic woe is literally 'too many people', I'm sure nothing could possibly go wrong! shoves the Russian Revolution into the nearest closet
- 7
"But if I don't keep building new stuff at a rate that will bankrupt me, unemployment will continue to rise."
This raises a question for me. Are you the object of multiple migration waves, aka are you just getting overpowered by migration? If so, nothing to do but suck it up, though that shouldn't result in an economic slowdown (I've been holding off on 1.2, so I apologize if this is speculation on old versions).
In any case since your problem is maximizing growth with emphasis on employing your population, stop looking at good prices. If you have surplus polulation you should build whatever is your highest productivity divided by build cost. If you have farm at 10 productivity and industry at 20, build farms not industries. This maximizes the public return on investment (growth) while generally favoring 150 cost buildings which employ more people
This raises a question for me. Are you the object of multiple migration waves, aka are you just getting overpowered by migration? If so, nothing to do but suck it up, though that shouldn't result in an economic slowdown (I've been holding off on 1.2, so I apologize if this is speculation on old versions).
In any case since your problem is maximizing growth with emphasis on employing your population, stop looking at good prices. If you have surplus polulation you should build whatever is your highest productivity divided by build cost. If you have farm at 10 productivity and industry at 20, build farms not industries. This maximizes the public return on investment (growth) while generally favoring 150 cost buildings which employ more people
Last edited:
- 1
On a separate note, if you feel your construction sector is too large (because you don't need construction, which contradicts your claim that you have unemploment), you have to wean yourself off of it. That's not an instant process, you gotta delete bit by bit and build stuff to compensate (industries which will benefit from goods that previously were used in construction for example).
dude your subsidies are 7,56M because the pris -75%, is there no way to use more tranportation? (enable all pm's that require it, try to encourage consumtion etc), also lower price of input goods if possible. 50% of fixed expenses as subsidies seems high,
(also i would go autocracy, regress any welfare payments and let excess people starve or flee)
It is called a construction bubble. Normally this happens in real world with real estate but here the way construction sector works and how it affects employment in the game can create similar situations.
I had reached 20000 construction points in one game and suffered a similar situation, what I did was accept the unemployment and downsize construction, it created economic contraction but it corrected itself eventually when the people got employed in other places.
I had reached 20000 construction points in one game and suffered a similar situation, what I did was accept the unemployment and downsize construction, it created economic contraction but it corrected itself eventually when the people got employed in other places.
- 3
I have a hard time believing you need that much construction for your current population and GDP. I am running slightly more construction than you (26k), at twice the GDP and 250M extra pops.
Granted I have a lot of unemployment, but that is entirely confined to the unincorporated colonies (mostly China), in order to encourage them to migrate to the factories in the core. I am having no issues funding the construction required to keep everyone in the core employed where the growth rate is closer to 3%, indeed I am overbuilding a lot to generate jobs demand and give my construction something to do.
I am running nearly full automation and highest level pm's across the entire economy, though still missing a few of the late game techs and avoiding oil based automation because there simply isn't enough oil, and also a workforce ratio at 42% still trending toward 57%.
I am also on workers coops so the investment pool is essentially nil and construction is 99% government funded
I still haven't reached arc welding, so it may be that steel construction is simply cheaper per point at the moment?
I am using max transportation consumption PM's, as well as max feasible production (Electric + Steel Carriages), but my transportation is still not cheap
What are you doing to overproduce and under use transportation so hard?
If your transportation is so cheap, you would probably better off getting rid of carriages to reduce supply and boost infrastructure, and then delete now surplus railways (or just leave them if you are going to need the infrastructure any time soon).
Granted I have a lot of unemployment, but that is entirely confined to the unincorporated colonies (mostly China), in order to encourage them to migrate to the factories in the core. I am having no issues funding the construction required to keep everyone in the core employed where the growth rate is closer to 3%, indeed I am overbuilding a lot to generate jobs demand and give my construction something to do.
I am running nearly full automation and highest level pm's across the entire economy, though still missing a few of the late game techs and avoiding oil based automation because there simply isn't enough oil, and also a workforce ratio at 42% still trending toward 57%.
I am also on workers coops so the investment pool is essentially nil and construction is 99% government funded
I still haven't reached arc welding, so it may be that steel construction is simply cheaper per point at the moment?
I am using max transportation consumption PM's, as well as max feasible production (Electric + Steel Carriages), but my transportation is still not cheap
What are you doing to overproduce and under use transportation so hard?
If your transportation is so cheap, you would probably better off getting rid of carriages to reduce supply and boost infrastructure, and then delete now surplus railways (or just leave them if you are going to need the infrastructure any time soon).
- 1
- 1
There is an almost 3 point difference in SOL between your nations, it's quite possible that the majority of his middle and better-off-low strata are just below the SOL requirement for Transportation demand to unlock. Plus, given how it scales on higher SOLs your rich pops are probably inducing also a lot of extra demand for it.
I had some games where I (think I) did run into a pretty similiar problem, SOL stagnation causing mid-to-late game economy issues that ballooned Railway upkeep. I even had a game where I never managed to get past SOL 20 as CHI because of that - although that was also one where I had to declare an early bankruptcy due to two defensive wars against Russia at the worst possible time.
Pop consumption accounts for 2/5ths of the demand, yes. Though I have workers coops so there are no rich pops really, but lots of demand from huge numbers of fairly well off pops all the same. I suspect I also have way more plantations using railroads, given that Germany lacks plantation potential and SM isn't a pariah yet (still trading), whilst I have probably gone past the 999 cap several times over. The more urbanized the market, the worse the infrastructure to transportation demand ratio becomes, which is why he would almost certainly benefit from dropping carriages.
His pop growth is 9M new people per year (without immigration).
If your buildings have 4k worker each that is 2250 buildings you need per year. If you are out of resource building slots, and arable land buildings would just crash agricultural prices then an average building might cost 450 construction points. That requires about a million construction points in the year, or 19k construction points per week. This could be lowered a bit by discounts from construction buildings and decrees.
If each building has only 3k workers then you need more like 24k construction points per week.
He said that he already isn't using carriages and can't have less railways due to infrastructure limitations. I think the problem is that factories use lots of infrastructure and little transportation goods. While resource buildings and agriculture buildings use little infrastructure and have PMs that use lots of transportation goods. If you are industrialized enough then you overproduce transport.
- 2
- 1
Looking at the save, I think you're not in as much trouble as you think. Yes, you have 7.5M unemployed pops... But that's just 1.8% of your population. And those unemployed pops are doing pretty well - on Welfare Payment alone they reach SoL 18, and it costs your budget just 880k per week. I think you can afford to significantly reduce the construction capacity, though it's definitely better to that gradually.
Even if you want to avoid unemployment on principle, you can still afford to reduce the construction capacity a bit - assuming every building level costs 450 construction points and 4k employees per level, you catch up to the population growth at ~19.5k Construction Points per week.
Oh, and downsizing Healthcare and Worker Protection institutions would reduce the population growth rate (not by much, but with exponential growth every bit counts).
Even if you want to avoid unemployment on principle, you can still afford to reduce the construction capacity a bit - assuming every building level costs 450 construction points and 4k employees per level, you catch up to the population growth at ~19.5k Construction Points per week.
Oh, and downsizing Healthcare and Worker Protection institutions would reduce the population growth rate (not by much, but with exponential growth every bit counts).
- 10
- 1
- 1
I think what would really help in situations like this is a service sector building to suck up lots of pops late-game and produce services. Services should also fulfill a new need which scales exponentially like other goods called 'Leisure' starting at SoL 20 or so. Another need would unlock for 'Professional Services' at SoL 45 which also scales exponentially. This way the urban centre problem of the late-game is solved, and the devs don't need to worry too much about balancing the outrageous pop growth since there'd be a way to employ people anyways.
- 3
Ah my mistake, I misread and thought we was still using carriages. You are right, yes, the more industrialized an economy is the worse the infrastructure to transportation demand ratio becomes. They really ought to make buildings pay for the infrastructure they require.
Are you factoring in the construction efficiency bonus from local construction sectors? If you mostly confine your urban construction to states that have maxed out construction sectors buildings will build quite a bit faster.
Nope. I closed off all immigration a year or so ago. The POP growth you are seeing is what I have to absorb.
I'm willing to use that terminology, especially after something Xaelyn just said.
Well, I'm trying not to have that. You are trying to move POPs around using unemployment to do so. I understand your situation, but it's a bit different from mine.
This makes me wonder whether swapping PMs and adding construction sectors (to roughly equal current CPs) would be better or worse than the current situation.
You have given me some food for thought.
Let me be clear:
I'm not complaining that "muh game is ruined because spreadsheet tells me bad things happen in five years." In terms of playing the game, and in terms of real world economics, I'm doing pretty good.
But since I'm not an economist, I saw this weird situation and didn't even have a vocabulary to discuss it. It's like when stagflation hit the US in the 1970s. When it first started, a lot of academics didn't even know what to call it or that such a situation was even possible. Now, since I'm not an economist, I figured someone had a term and a way of conceptualizing what I was seeing. I just looked at it and was like "Umm, this is weird, and I don't even know what to say about it."
And since we have a Dev here, I want to use my weird economic situation here to highlight one of the things I really like about beta 1.2: GDP changes. Not because I actually care that much about how GDP is calculated, but because the nerf to GDP values nerfs minting income which, in previous iterations of the game, basically meant that at a certain point of economic growth, you just let minting income do the work since it would eclipse other incomes.
The changes to GDP, coupled with turmoil impact on construction speed, really makes the game better, not just more difficult. I wouldn't want Vic3 to become the Elden Ring of 19th century colonialism and economics games. (How would Austria dodge, anyway?)
But the thought of Elden Ring being a competition between the great powers of the 19th Century is funny, so here you go:
That's a whole other discussion to have on another day. I actually plan to do that at some point with a better save that takes infrastructure down to the absolute minimum required to have 100% market access in all states and talk about the disconnect between infra and transport costs.
Basically, I never have profitable railways past 200 million GDP. And that's with all railway using PMs in use, cargo prioritization, and any other trick I can think of to drive up transportation demand.
- 1
SOL boosting pops is the key for a healthy mid-to-late game economy.
The extra transportation demand contains the Railway subsidies cost increase and induces demand for other goods, boosting the entire industry. Once you reach a point where you have more or less full employment within your resource capacity you cut taxes as much as possible. This will also boost private investment, to a point where you can actually just rely on private construction to compensate for population growth if you have done proper growth control during the mid game.
That's really it. Once your resources peak it's all downhill from there. Only solution past that is the conquest of more resources in areas with lower pop density per resource than your own country.
The extra transportation demand contains the Railway subsidies cost increase and induces demand for other goods, boosting the entire industry. Once you reach a point where you have more or less full employment within your resource capacity you cut taxes as much as possible. This will also boost private investment, to a point where you can actually just rely on private construction to compensate for population growth if you have done proper growth control during the mid game.
That's really it. Once your resources peak it's all downhill from there. Only solution past that is the conquest of more resources in areas with lower pop density per resource than your own country.